| 1 |
On 05/05/2016 09:17 AM, Duncan wrote: |
| 2 |
> Patrick Lauer posted on Thu, 05 May 2016 07:13:00 +0200 as excerpted: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> So again, because I feel like either I'm too stupid to understand this, |
| 5 |
>> or too smart to let such an obviously bad idea continue: |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> What problem is being solved here? |
| 8 |
> For one thing, the namespace issue of runscript being generic, while |
| 9 |
> openrc-run is properly namespaced and thus much less likely to conflict |
| 10 |
> with anything else. |
| 11 |
... which wasn't a problem for the first decade. The first time a name |
| 12 |
collision was noticed was when debian packaging was attempted. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> That would be why openrc's upstream maintainer is changing the name, with |
| 15 |
> appropriate deprecation notice for the old one. Given that, what gentoo |
| 16 |
> has to decide is how it's going to respond to that. Sure, we /could/ |
| 17 |
> rename the executable to runscript here and be done with it, but that |
| 18 |
> would violate gentoo's policy of defaulting to consistency with upstream |
| 19 |
> unless there's a very good reason not to. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> The fact that the packages upstream maintainer happens to be a gentoo dev |
| 22 |
> and that gentoo happens to host the project and be its primary testing |
| 23 |
> ground and user base shouldn't change that. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Of course if upstream policy is thought by devs willing to do the work to |
| 26 |
> be irrational, they can of course fork the package. There's certainly |
| 27 |
> precedent for that. But someone's gotta be willing to do the work |
| 28 |
> necessary to create and maintain that fork, so... |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
So you're saying that a Gentoo-specific change in Gentoo happens because |
| 31 |
the Gentoo maintainer doesn't care about Gentoo? ;) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Somehow I still don't see a *problem* being solved, and the runscript |
| 34 |
binary/symlink pretty much has to stay there indefinitely unless you |
| 35 |
want to make life exciting for people that have their own or adapted |
| 36 |
init scripts. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
To summarize: Lots of churn, no visible benefit, except that some OCD |
| 39 |
people could feel better: except that we can't actually fix the core |
| 40 |
'issue' without making lots of other people very sad. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Y'all have too much free time ... ;) |
Archives